4.6 Article

Increased lean red meat intake does not elevate markers of oxidative stress and inflammation in humans

期刊

JOURNAL OF NUTRITION
卷 137, 期 2, 页码 363-367

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/jn/137.2.363

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Red meat intake has been associated with increased risk of coronary heart disease and type 2 diabetes, but it remains uncertain whether these associations are causally related to unprocessed lean red meat. It has been proposed that iron derived from red meat may increase iron stores and initiate oxidative damage and inflammation. We aimed to determine whether an increase in unprocessed lean red meat intake, partially replacing carbohydrate-rich foods, adversely influences markers of oxidative stress and inflammation. Sixty participants completed an 8-wk parallel-designed study. They were randomized to maintain their usual diet (control) or to partially replace energy from carbohydrate-rich foods with similar to 200 g/d of lean red meat (red meat) in isoenergetic diets. Markers of oxidative stress and inflammation were measured at baseline and at the end of intervention. Results are presented as the mean between-group difference in change and [95% CI]. Red meat, relative to control, resulted in: higher protein [5.3 (3.7, 6.9) % of energy], lower carbohydrate [-5.3 (-7.9, -2.7) % of energy], and higher iron [3.2 (1.1, 5.4) mg/d] intakes; lower urinary F-2-isoprostane excretion [-137 (-264, -9) pmol/ mmol creatinine], lower leukocyte [-0.51 (-0.99, -0.02) X 10(9)/L] counts, and a trend for lower serum C-reactlve protein concentrations [-1.6 (-3.3, 0.0) mg/L, P = 0.06]; and no differences in concentrations of plasma F-2-isoprostanes [-12 (-122, 100) pmol/L], serum gamma-glytamyltransferase [-0.8 (-3.2, 1.5) U/L], serum amyloid A protein [-1.4 (-3.4, 0.5) mg/L], and plasma fibrinogen concentrations [-0.08 (-0.40. 0.24) g/L]. Our results suggest that partial replacement of dietary carbohydrate with protein from lean red meat does not elevate oxidative stress or inflammation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据